$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010850092025 + BAIL APPLN. 4147/2025 RAVI .....Applicant Through: Mr. Abhik Kumar, Mr. Rinku Mathur and Ms. Divya Gupta, Advs. versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State with Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, Advs. with SI- Mukesh Kumar, PS: Mundka Mr. Anuj Kapoor, Adv. (DHCLSC) with Mr. Nandeesh Nanda and Mr. Shivom Sethi, Advs. for kith and kin of the deceased. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE O R D E R % 12.08.2026 1. At the outset, since learned counsel for applicant seeks to proceed with arguments without awaiting recording of the evidence of the eye witness and/ or wife of the deceased, this Court is proceeding to hear him and learned APP on merits. 2. By virtue of the present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in proceedings arising out of FIR No.178/2025 dated 11.03.2025 registered at PS.: Mundka, Delhi under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 3. As per FIR, at around 7:00 AM on 09.03.2025, the complainant and This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/08/2026 at 11:26:02 his brother Sushil, who drives a water-supply tractor, set out to deliver water, reaching the Tape Company on Street No.1 by about 11:00 AM. While the complainant got down at the corner to have some gutkha, his brother Sushil went to deliver the water. Moments later, the complainant heard Sushil shouting and saw from a distance that the applicant, a Tata Ace worker at the company, was arguing with Sushil over placement of a water jug. The argument escalated as the applicant punched Sushil repeatedly in the stomach as also kicked him. By the time the complainant reached the spot, the applicant had fled with the tempo. Whereafter, the complainant helped the injured Sushil back to the tractor, and they returned to the water plant to rest, without informing anyone or approaching the Police. Later that night, since Sushil started having severe pain in the stomach, he was rushed to the Hospital. Hence, the present FIR under Section 110 of BNS was registered. 4. Later on, information was received from the Hospital that Sushil (deceased) passed away during treatment. Accordingly, his Port-mortem was carried out, as per which the cause of death was “… …septicemia consequent upon operated case of perforation peritonitis consequent upon injury to abdomen produced by blunt force impact.”. 5. In this factual backdrop, this Court has heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned APP and learned counsel for kith and kin of deceased supporting him, as also perused the materials on record. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances involved herein, particularly, the nature and gravity of the accusations levelled against the applicant, the severity of the punishment prescribed in the event of conviction as also the factum that the applicant has been categorically This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/08/2026 at 11:26:02 named in the FIR, so much so, the applicant is stated to be the main perpetrator, who is stated to have repeatedly hit the deceased in his abdomen, eventually leading to his death. That, coupled with the fact that the Post-Mortem Report also categorically states that the cause of death is “… …septicemia consequent upon operated case of perforation peritonitis consequent upon injury to abdomen produced by blunt force impact.”, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant, at this stage. 7. Moreover, though investigation is complete and the chargesheet has also been filed, however, since it is an admitted position that ‘evidence of the eye-witness and the wife of the deceased is yet to commence’, as noted in the last order dated 27.04.2026 passed by this Court, there is an apprehension that the applicant, if released on bail, may temper with the evidence and/ or influence the witnesses, which could lead to eventually derailing the trial proceedings. 8. In view of the aforesaid, the present application is dismissed. 9. Needless to say, expression of view(s) on the merits, if any, are solely for the purposes of adjudication of the present application and shall have no bearing on the overall case/ trial involved. SAURABH BANERJEE, J AUGUST 12, 2026/bh/DA This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/08/2026 at 11:26:02